Risk of using slower powder?

[NewbieDave007]

Is there any safety concerns with utilizing a powder that is too slow for a "normal" load in a caliber?

Would a longer pressure curve cause any issues with a bolt action?

Could a powder be so slow that un-burnt powder causes a safety issue, or would the powder from the last round get pushed out with each subsequent round?

Is there any reason that I shouldn't try WC860 in 243 WIN as a reduced load for my kids?

I don't mind doing the leg work of finding something that works for what I'm wanting, but I just don't know enough to know if what I'm curious on is safe to test out. I can't see a reason why it would be unsafe, but there are tons of people on here that know way more than I do and I'd prefer to experiment only if it is safe.

Thanks.
Dave

[pworley1]

I have had no issues with WC860 in 6.5 loads, I doubt that you would with 243. I think there are many here who are expert in the use of these powders.

[NewbieDave007]

Thanks pworley.

Can you tell me more about your experience in that caliber? I'm assuming that the recoil is more of a push than a sharp recoil, right? Any issues with excess un-burnt powder?

I'm not asking for your load data, but is it basically a full case or something close to that?

Thanks.
Dave

[Artful]

SEE *(Secondary Explosive Effect) is one danger of using too little of too slow a powder. Generally you want to use 50% by volume or more of powder in a case. If you have to load less than 50%, I generally change to a faster burning powder to get the velocity I want. One thing about slower powders is they naturally give a slower velocity than a more energetic powder.

I'll give you an example in something like a 45-70 you can load a case full of 4831 powder and it will never reach overload condition because the powder is too slow in burn rate - if you take a faster powder like 3031 - with a normal you'll fill the case up over 50% but you can reach overload conditons by filling all the case volume available with the faster burning powder. Take it to the extreme and change to a pistol powder like Unique - 10 to 13 grains will give you a great low recoil load but a case full is almost sure to take the gun apart.

That's why we use trailboss in some of the medium and larger capacity cases - it's bulky and burns fast so is ideal for working up reduced loads.

What velocity are you trying for with what boolit?

[NewbieDave007]

Hey Art! I was trying to give you a break from my questions, but I should have just come to you or asked you on the 24th (assuming that I can go, which is looking good so far).

Agreed that if the bullet/boolit doesn't clear the barrel that sending another behind it would not be good (to say the least).

I hadn't gotten to the point yet of determining a desired velocity or bullet/boolit. I bought the kids a Ruger American in .243 WIN and was thinking that if I could use the WC860 that I have it might kill two birds with one stone. 1) Reduced recoil for the kids, but they are shooting centerfire instead of 22lr. 2) I get to use a powder that I have very little use for.

I would imagine that with such a slow powder (WC860) that the case would be more than 50% full and in fact I would assume that I could fill the case without casing too much pressure. With that said, that is my hypothesis and I'm not knowledgeable enough to know for sure, so that's why the questions to make sure it is safe before I risk a brand new gun or myself.

[sargenv]

I don't think he;s trying to use a small amount of ultra slow burning powder.. more like will a full case of this cheaper slow burning powder being any danger.. It's not ideal since it will not develop the pressure and velocity of the correct speed powder.. but I don't see it as any hinderance as long as you know that you won't get max velocity..

On another note, I was curious about heavy bullet 10 mm loads utilizing a slow burner like WC820. So I tried to see if loading a max charge of WC820 with a 190 gr Jacketed bullet would get me where I wanted to go.. It worked okay in my revolver, but it left all sorts of unburned powder, but it still shot, just that it was not the high velocity like I was looking for. There wasn't enough case capacity to make the velocity I was looking for (like in the longer 357, 41, and 44 magnum cases with their heavier bullets of 180, 210, and 240 g). It didn't lodge a bullet in the bore, it just wasn't ideal.. I think this is the answer he is looking for in using these slow burning surplus rifle powders meant for larger cases.. being utilized in the smaller limited capacity cases like the 243 Win and the like..

Someone else can chime in here... but I think this is where he is going with his line of questions...

[NewbieDave007]

Exactly! I know that it isn't ideal, from the pure shooting standpoint, but just a baby step along the way and utilizing a powder that I have too much of and no real use for.

sargenv - Did you happen to try a magnum primer to see if it would spike a little higher? I know that also opens the door for making the powder a little more unpredictable by breaking the powder bits up and possibly burning faster, but I wonder if that would help with what you were after. <=That's just a question and thought process and not coming from any personal knowledge.

[45 2.1]

You guys need to listen........... do not, for any reason, use a too slow for the cartridge powder (or a slow for the cartridge powder either) at under 80% density. That would be related to SEE...... it is not 50%.

Now, the idea of using slow powder for plinkers is not the best idea. Using it for big heavy boolited cheap shooting is. There are ways to do that easily, but most people do not follow directions. You need to learn HOW, WHY and WHEN to do that.

[pworley1]

I use a lot of surplus powder. I mostly use WC860 and WC872. I shoot it in almost everything from 45 70 to 6.5 x52 with good results. I use it for my hunting loads with the 35 Whelen as a duplex load. I have found that it is a little like black powder in that it likes a full case. There is a lot of information on this site in the Castpics link at the bottom of all the pages.

[pworley1]

This link does not list 243 but I think it will give you some good ideas of what you can do.
http://www.castpics.net/LoadData/Surplus/default.html

[leeggen]

NewbieDave007 how old are your children? A 243 does not kick, atleast mine doesn't. I use 100gr jacketed and IMR 4350. If you want a little less kick just go to a lighter bullet and use the lowend charge. Accurasy will not be great but they can shoot it.
CD

[NewbieDave007]

My kids are 8 & 11. My 8 year old son will pull the trigger on anything at least twice and enjoys recoil. My 11 year old daughter is the one that I'm more concerned about. She doesn't like any recoil but is also getting a little bored with the 22lr. She's also on the fence about shooting in general so I have to be very careful about my next steps.

[fast ronnie]

I don't have experience with the 860 powder, BUT you shouldn't use some of the slow powders at less than starting load. It doesn't ALWAYS happen, but you can have what has been called a detonation. The phenomenon has not been fully explained, but the theory is that the flame front will go across rhe top of the powder and set it off ALL AT ONCE instead of a controlled slow burn. 4831 is a great offender in this regard, but is not the only powder that can do this. I had it happen in a wildcat round when starting to work up loads with t 322 powder. i was fortunate and didn't blow up the gun. That is not exactly the slowest powder out there, either. One load was all it took for me to disassemble all the rounds and put two more grains powder in the case. Some powders work well with reduced loads, and some don't. For instance, Bullseye can be loaded down to the point of the bullet not exiting the barrel and not detonate, although it would be wise to fix that problem quickly. 4831, I wouldn't DARE to load below minimums. Until you have more experience, stick to published loads as they have been tested under controlled conditions. The same with maximum loads. I had a friend who would look in the manual and load to the highest load without ever working up looking for pressure signs. That, too can be a real bad idea. There are guys on this forum who have tried a lot of different things, especially with reduced loads. The information learned by them is very valuable. You are asking good questions, and asking them in a real good place to get answers. I don't have the correct answer for you and that particular powder, but someone here will.

[Artful]

You guys need to listen........... do not, for any reason, use a too slow for the cartridge powder (or a slow for the cartridge powder either) at under 80% density. That would be related to SEE...... it is not 50%.

I'm going from memory, I remember 50% load density but I may be confusing it with field artillery guns which were destroyed when shooting small charges of slow burning powder.

- googlage shows
http://www.reloadammo.com/liteload.htm
http://www.guns.connect.fi/gow/QA3.html
http://guns.connect.fi/gow/QA6.html
http://www.africanxmag.com/secondary_explosion_effect.htm
http://www.thehighroad.org/archive/index.php/t-142220.html

Firearms Pressure Factors, by Lloyd E. Brownell, Ph.D., and several assistants.
Published by Wolfe Press in 1990 (ISBN 0-935632-85-9).

Dr. Brownell believed the phenomenon regarding small charges of relatively slow burning powder in large cases that causes firearms - primarily rifles - to blow up. Conventional handgun rounds do not seem to be subject to this event. Although subject of double and triple charges of fast burning pistol powders - and
esp with 38 hollow base wadcutters in target loads of bullseye shooters.

The event seems to be restricted to rifles, specifically rifles with larger cases.
There are several theories, but none have been demonstrated that will reliably blow up a gun on command; so the event isn't completely understood.

There are instances of rifles coming apart seemingly as the result of a smaller than normal charge of slow burning powder. Dr. Brownell's reseach - with pressure systems and oscilliscopes - did in fact show up some curious and unexplained pressure 'excursions' where spikes of pressure occurred during the testing.

Julian S. Hatcher also did some testing on the effects of powder position in a case. Again, with rifles only - the .30-06 military round, I believe - identically loaded rounds with powder charges that did not fill the case where chronographed with the rifle held level and shaken to distribute the powder through the case, and then with the rifle held muzzle up prior to firing and carefully brought to level and again with muzzle held down prior to firing and again carefully brought up to level with powder against the projectile.

In all instances, the rounds with the powder near the primer gave greater velocity. Without question the position of powder in the case has an effect on the pressure curve.

I also found reference to Terry Wieland's article "Chamber Pressure Revelations" for Handloader some while back. And another article by our own Larry Gibson.
Larry did it with 6.5x55 cartridge I think.

Also Dave Emery, Hornady's balistician wrote the same phenomenon in the 6.5 Carcano when he was developing the rounds for Graf & Son. Mr. Emery attributed it to 4831 and 4350 being heavily coated with deterrents and, as above, the primer pushes the bullet into the rifling leade and leaving it stuck while the fire almost goes out in the propellant charge. Therefore, Mr. Emery recommended against loading the .268" Hornady bullets with either 4831, 4350, or anything slower in the 6.5 Carcano.

[groovy mike]

why roll the dice on your kids life/eyes? Use a recommended load and swap or sell the powder that you have too much of.

[NewbieDave007]

First, let's get one straight, at no point am I rolling the dice on my kids. This thread isn't bragging that I've just blindly and randomly put a pipe bomb in my kid's hands to hold and lite off. This thread is about fully understanding a concept before the possibility of placing a brand new rifle next to MY head with rounds that have slower powder than published data and testing it. I brought up my kids to explain my thought process and one of the driving factors. At no point have I said that I would do this, but came here to understand a concept that I was unable to find applicable information about on my own. I may end up only utilizing published data, but until I fully understand the concept that I've been asking about I won't make that call.

[MT Gianni]

The 243 is very cast friendly. I would start with a 244496 or RCBS 95 fp and 12 gr 2400. Accurate and not much louder than a 22 mag with similar recoil.
As an alternative 75 gr bullets have much less recoil than 100 gr ones.

[Maven]

ND007, I've used quite a few jugs of WC 860 in my nominally .30cal rifles with heavy CB's, but would NOT recommend it for the .243Win. I tried it once with Ly. 245496 (87gr. Loverin, GC design) and got very poor results and more unburned powder than you'd believe. In spite of using LR mag. primers: It was everywhere: bbl., chamber, empty cases. Moreover, there was so much unburned powder in the chamber that the ejector on my Ruger #1, which is normally vigorous, wouldn't remove the fired cases. As MT Gianni suggested, Aliant Unique is a much, much better choice, but I'd start at 9.5gr. and not exceed 10.5gr.

[Char-Gar]

Keep the loading density at 100% and there will be no safety issues with WCC 860 and cast bullets. BUT as Maven said, you will not be happy with the results.

I shoot allot of WC 872 in 30-06, 308 and 30-40 rifles with heavier cast bullets and get excellent results. But even then, there is unburned powder in the barrel and sometimes in the chamber. I put up with it due to the great accuracy, but it is there.

[NewbieDave007]

Thanks for the information guys. I appreciate it. I still need to read more before I decide on what to do.

Thanks.
Dave

[sargenv]

Yeah, I never went with magnum primers since I was already using lare pistol primers in a tuned revolver and getting Federal Magnum large pistol primers, just wasn't in the cards.. I wasn't all THAT interested.. just curious with what I already had.. I really didn't expect to get the velocity of a magnum round.. for that I have a 657 where I can get magnum performance... out of the 41 magnum.

[Elkins45]

Now, the idea of using slow powder for plinkers is not the best idea. Using it for big heavy boolited cheap shooting is. There are ways to do that easily, but most people do not follow directions. You need to learn HOW, WHY and WHEN to do that.

For those of us that do follow directions, would you mind pointing us in the correct direction to learn how, why and when?

[ballistim]

One thing I've learned is to use slow burning powders that can safely be used for the cartridge based on if they will fill at least 80% case capacity, preferably 86% or more & even compressed using heavy bullets without signs of increased pressure. "J" loads in reloading manuals can give an idea of possible powder choices used for the cartridge you're loading for. I've had success with IMR 7383, WC-846, WC-860, & WC-872 for the slower burners.
Here are a couple of examples of load development from years ago using a certain lot of IMR 7383 that was available at that time;
http://tapatalk.imageshack.com/v2/15/01/16/062f93af31917b8911b17b76df4df667.jpghttp://tapatalk.imageshack.com/v2/15/01/16/d229e4f2403662a2ff7bbbc7c516de49.jpg
This is what worked for me, and I found out about this from others who had worked with this particular lot of powder. I was able to achieve better than 1/2" 5 shot groups with this particular powder in two different M70's in 30-06 so my efforts payed off. "Your Mileage May Vary" as is often said around here, hope this helps someone.

[swheeler]

One thing I've learned is to use slow burning powders that can safely be used for the cartridge based on if they will fill at least 80% case capacity, preferably 86% or more & even compressed using heavy bullets without signs of increased pressure. "J" loads in reloading manuals can give an idea of possible powder choices used for the cartridge you're loading for. I've had success with IMR 7383, WC-846, WC-860, & WC-872 for the slower burners.
Here are a couple of examples of load development from years ago using a certain lot of IMR 7383 that was available at that time;
http://tapatalk.imageshack.com/v2/15/01/16/062f93af31917b8911b17b76df4df667.jpghttp://tapatalk.imageshack.com/v2/15/01/16/d229e4f2403662a2ff7bbbc7c516de49.jpg
This is what worked for me, and I found out about this from others who had worked with this particular lot of powder. I was able to achieve better than 1/2" 5 shot groups with this particular powder in two different M70's in 30-06 so my efforts payed off. "Your Mileage May Vary" as is often said around here, hope this helps someone.

WC846 is not a "slow burner" but actually a medium speed powder

[ballistim]

WC846 is not a "slow burner" but actually a medium speed powder

I stand corrected.

[freebullet]

I used 7383 in a 223 with lead. The results weren't real exciting.

I would start with the heaviest boolit and 85% case capacity charge weight with the boolit seated. Check for leading, unburned powder build up, pressure signs, & accuracy each shot. You might be able to work out a 50 yard 50 round load for the kids.

Let us know if it works.

[winelover]

Slow vs Medium vs Fast. What's the definitive cut-off? I've been playing with AA2520 and cast in .308 Winchester. Accurate's data lists an average of 45 grains for a 150 J-word. I like this ball powder for jacketed and consequently have a large supply of it. I started at @ 80% load density and got dismal groups. I slowly reduced the charges looking for accuracy as well as cycling. (shooting a Armalite carbine) I am now down to 26 grains or roughly 58% load density. I am not using fillers. Accuracy is less than 2MOA at 100 yards. I began experiencing the start of sluggish cycling so this is the lowest I would go. Am I treading on dangerous ground with this powder? No one lists cast data for AA 2520.


Winelover

[ballistim]

I don't know what is the technical cut-off point for fast/medium/slow other than to say that AA2520 is in the neighborhood of 4064 and is faster than BL-C2 which is the closest burn rate to the lot of surplus WC-846 that swheeler identified as a medium burning powder, which in comparison to the others I mentioned it is. I have faster surplus powders as well. Hope that someone can help with making an informed call on where on a burn rate chart the cut-off point is to determine a slow burning powder.

[Duckiller]

Dave, a 2014 Hodgdon give away manual lists a max load of 15.3 grains of Trail Boss for 100 grain Speer boat tail spire point. Velocity is 1603 fps. Not what you want in terms of what powder to use but is a load that your daughter should have no problem with the recoil.

[NewbieDave007]

Thanks guys. I'm going to start with published data and then see if there is even a recoil issue.

I like the idea of 1600 fps. I have one "pound" container of trail boss and I just picked up a box of those bullets last night.

Thanks guys.

[Blanco]

I know Trail Boss was brought up earlier... I have not tried it, but I will, actually sounds like fun.
There is a load in there for .243

http://www.imrpowder.com/PDF/Trail-Boss-data.pdf

[Lloyd Smale]

my take on it is it just doesn't make sense to buy surplus powder because its cheaper then turn around and use 3 times for of it for each round then a gun could with fast burning powder. 860 and its close relatives are good powders for the magnum rifle rounds and even somewhat for a few non magnum rounds so why not use it for what it works best and makes economic sense with. Its pretty easy to come up with what is to slow for an application. Just look at load data and if a full case of powder is more then about a 100 fps off of the fastest load its to slow. If you have to cram so much of it in a case that its hard to seat a bullet its to slow. IF you have to light it off with a faster burning powder to get it to burn its WAY to slow. I try to use the powder that gives the best performance and efficiency in every different cartridge I load for. Never was one of those "what two powders can I buy to cover everything" crowd or "can I load a 22 hornet with 50bmg machine gun powder" I could care less. theres proper powders for every application so why try making some what its not.

[ballistim]

my take on it is it just doesn't make sense to buy surplus powder because its cheaper then turn around and use 3 times for of it for each round then a gun could with fast burning powder. 860 and its close relatives are good powders for the magnum rifle rounds and even somewhat for a few non magnum rounds so why not use it for what it works best and makes economic sense with

I agree somewhat. Slow burning powders have been my choices often because of the ability to fill a case & produce accurate loads often with less pressure than a faster burning powder, although not using a faster burning because of fear of a double charge is an over emphasis IMO since I trust my reloading practices to avoid doing so. Example of using slow burning inexpensive surplus powder; Duplex 45-70 load using WC-860 or WC-872 with IMR-4198, 6gr. IMR 4198 kicker, 48gr. WC-872 with a 405gr. cast. Load approximates a trapdoor velocity load, is accurate & pleasant to shoot along with the benefit of being a compressed inexpensive load having purchased WC-872 for $48.00 for each 8lb. jug. Cost of using a full load of IMR 4198 or a comparable powder would increase cost & I've avoided that. I've used this example knowing how controversial duplex loading is, I've done it carefully & safely and would not advise it to anyone who doesn't take the time to do so. First reload ever for me was a nearly compressed surplus H4831 load in my 6.5x55 back in my teens, and accuracy with low pressure & low cost appealed to me from the start. I've found that approach to often work well for me over the years; filling rifle cases as much as possible with a powder that produces accuracy and velocity without pressure signs, and when I can accomplish this at a reduced cost using a surplus powder I do so. I realize this doesn't work for everyone or even most but it works for me. Didn't mean to write a book on the subject but wanted to explain my reasons for how I approach this.

[25ring]

I agree somewhat. Slow burning powders have been my choices often because of the ability to fill a case & produce accurate loads often with less pressure than a faster burning powder, although not using a faster burning because of fear of a double charge is an over emphasis IMO since I trust my reloading practices to avoid doing so. Example of using slow burning inexpensive surplus powder; Duplex 45-70 load using WC-860 or WC-872 with IMR-4198, 6gr. IMR 4198 kicker, 48gr. WC-872 with a 405gr. cast. Load approximates a trapdoor velocity load, is accurate & pleasant to shoot along with the benefit of being a compressed inexpensive load having purchased WC-872 for $48.00 for each 8lb. jug. Cost of using a full load of IMR 4198 or a comparable powder would increase cost & I've avoided that. I've used this example knowing how controversial duplex loading is, I've done it carefully & safely and would not advise it to anyone who doesn't take the time to do so. First reload ever for me was a nearly compressed surplus H4831 load in my 6.5x55 back in my teens, and accuracy with low pressure & low cost appealed to me from the start. I've found that approach to often work well for me over the years; filling rifle cases as much as possible with a powder that produces accuracy and velocity without pressure signs, and when I can accomplish this at a reduced cost using a surplus powder I do so. I realize this doesn't work for everyone or even most but it works for me. Didn't mean to write a book on the subject but wanted to explain my reasons for how I approach this.
Ballistim, I load for my Trapdoor the same way and part of the reason is I can duplicate blackpowder loads with the same pressures and velocities.With Swiss powder running $20.00lb a jug of WC872 and a RL-7 kicker is a pretty cheap alternative.

[ballistim]

Ballistim, I load for my Trapdoor the same way and part of the reason is I can duplicate blackpowder loads with the same pressures and velocities.With Swiss powder running $20.00lb a jug of WC872 and a RL-7 kicker is a pretty cheap alternative.

I found out about Cast Boolits from searching online for 45-70 loads using surplus powder when the powder insanity started & found 9.3x62 AL's duplex load of IMR4198 & WC860 and found it worked just as you've said; duplicating black powder loads with smokeless inexpensive surplus powder. Glad to hear it works for you too! I'll be able to shoot my 45-70's for a lifetime without worries about powder, primers, cases-and boolits, of course!

[Palmyrahicks]

Dave,

I got a modest shipment of WC860 and tried it in the 243 Win a few weeks back with 100g Soft Points, and CCI LRM's. It seems to work well with velocities of 2900+ FPS, cases about as full of the powder as I could get them. Moderate load but not a CB... or low energy.

[NewbieDave007]

Dave,

I got a modest shipment of WC860 and tried it in the 243 Win a few weeks back with 100g Soft Points, and CCI LRM's. It seems to work well with velocities of 2900+ FPS, cases about as full of the powder as I could get them. Moderate load but not a CB... or low energy.

Interesting. Thanks.

Btw, I didn't know that it came in "modest shipments". J/k.